This is a metastudy (17 page PDF) suggesting that an individual's acceptance of a MOOC is "substantially affected by its performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, self-efficacy, attitude, and facilitating conditions," resulting in an acceptance model called UTAUT. All of this makes sense to me, and it stands to reason that evaluating specific influences (for example, using the BIDR scale to evaluate social influence on a person) would offer a more fine-grained analysis of whether a particular MOOC will be accepted (and therefore used) by a particular individual or group of people. The real question (to my mind) is whether these categories are the best categories for this sort of analysis. Yes, things like 'effort' and 'attitude' correspond to intuitive 'natural kinds', but is it best to employ these (as opposed to hitherto undiscovered and unnamed categories discoverable by, say, deep learning; see the Hinton discussion below)?
Today: 0 Total: 1100 [Direct link] [Share]
